Air Superiority Grp.

[stormbringer3]

Playing as the Axis does anyone ever use anything besides Interceptors? Romania and Hungary start with Fighter Bombers but if there is no research in that advancement are they an instant disband? I'm wondering if researching Fighter Bombers is a viable idea?
Thanks for any opinions.

[ncc1701e]

As Axis, so far, I have mainly invested in Interceptors. Why? Because of Strategic Bombing, I would like to have the best Air Combat attributes possible to kill bombers and their escort fighters.

[AlvaroSousa]

You actually gave me an idea for them.

[stormbringer3]

Would you be willing to expand a little more on the above idea?
Thanks.

[sveint]

Fighter Bombers are OK, except that there is no way to have enough research for them because you NEED interceptors. So yes, disband.

[klzlueylx]

Stukas can offer a considerable damage or fight bonus in a land combat, and both GroundSupporters and Tactic bombers are cheap and effecive anti-naval planes, since carrier is too expensive and took a long time to build.

i use both airgroup above frequently.

Strategic Bombers were not so ideal. They are as expensive as CVs, but cannot deal a decent damage to industrys(just 2 times a tactic bomber can deal, but much more expensive, since the loss is high, too.).
In 1.0006 version, airgourps use manpower to reinforce it's strength, which would be a high loss if you use them frequently. Even in the latest update, it's still an unwise action to build strategic bombers, as they suffer too much loss but deals too less damage.

And seriously:

each Tactic bomber bombing city: 1 damage, 1 loss(ususally 1-5, most time 1-3, but i'll count it as 1)
each Strategic Bomber bombing city:2 damage, 1 loss(ususally 1-8, most time 2-4)
(each time)
let's say one day you used all your bombers, like 4Tactic,2 Strategic (yes,I did, i even had 3 Strategic in service),all of them bombed London, deals 2x(1+1+1+1+2+2)= 16 damage on it's production(London has 15 actually,). and your loss is 8 tactic, 4 strategic.

The total loss of Allied production is 16+14+12+10+8+6+4+2+0=72,
The repairing fee is 8*300/20 + 4*400/20 = 200.

the escorts of both sides were not included. I did deploy 4 AirSuperior in that area, range covering London and SouthAmpton, enemy has almost same air forces so don't warry it's unescorted.

See? It's just don't worth it, after all Strategic Bombers can hardly do anything else.

[Ostwindflak]

I was checking into Fighter Bombers last night in my game doing side by side comparisons with interceptors. I did not see a difference that made producing them worthwhile which is a shame. I could see them as an additional air unit to provide close air support, albeit at a lower ground attack value when you just don't have enough dedicated bombers to go around or maybe even interdict supply on road/railroads.

[stormbringer3]

Fighter Bombers used to have a better defense number in the later years but that was changed to the current values. Perhaps another change to their stats such as in the Tactical area could be done making a them better candidate for purchase.

[klzlueylx]

fighter bombers... the Stukas? or air unit advancement?
In practice i didnot found them so useful when supporting land combat, or doing ground strike. But it does provide a method to prevent enemy fleets getting near friendly lands, NO OTHER planes can provide naval strike effecive as GroundSupport airgroups.

Though it's not as good as carrier's air group, i'll purchase it for it took less time to build and fewer production points.

Comparing the loss of both side, convert these loss into production points then i know the only operation a bomber unit worth to do is anti-naval warfare.